OFFICIAL POLICY FOR
CHILD PROTECTION
POLICY
(Statutory)
Preamble
Nunthorpe fully recognises and embraces its responsibilities for Child Protection.
Context
Our policy applies to all colleagues, directors and volunteers working in the academy. There are five main elements to our
policy:
1. We practice safe recruitment in checking the suitability of staff and volunteers to work with all students.
2. We raise awareness of Child protection issues and equipping the students with the skills needed to keep them
safe.
3. We develop and then implement procedures for identifying and reporting cases, or suspected cases of abuse.
4. We support the students who have been abused in accordance with his/her agreed Child protection plan.
5. We have established a safe environment in which students can learn and develop.
We recognise that because of the day to day contact with students within the Academy , academy colleagues are well
placed to observe the outward signs of abuse. The academy therefore:
1. Established and has maintained an environment where students feel secure, are encouraged to talk, and are
listened to.
2. Ensure students know that there are adults in the academy whom they can approach if they are worried.
3. Include opportunities in the LIFE curriculum (and other relevant curricular areas) for students to develop the skills
they need to recognise and stay safe from abuse.
We will follow the guidance set out in the Department for Education FE Keeping Children Safe in Education Sept 2015
Working together to Safeguard Children 2013; guidance by the Tees Valley Local Safeguarding Children's Board and in
partnership with Cleveland Police (Channel/Operation Encompass).
This means that we will:
1. We have a team of designated Child protection officers who have received appropriate and up to date training and
support for these roles. (The Child Protection (CP) Team meet regularly to review student cases).
2. We have a nominated director responsible for Child protection.
3. We ensure every colleague (including temporary and supply staff and volunteers) and the directors know the name
of the designated senior person responsible for Child protection and their role.
4. We ensure all colleagues and volunteers understand their responsibilities in being alert to the signs of abuse and
their responsibility for referring any concerns to the designated senior person responsible for Child protection.
5. Ensure that parents have an understanding of the responsibility placed on the academy and colleagues for Child
protection through this policy.
6. We notify Social Care if there is an unexplained absence of more than two days of a student who is on the Child
protection register.
7. We develop effective links with relevant agencies and co-operate as required with their enquiries regarding Child
protection matters including attendance at case conferences.
8. We keep written records of concerns about students, even where there is no need to refer the matter immediately.
9. We ensure all records are kept securely.
10. We develop and then follow procedures where an allegation is made against a colleague or volunteer.
11. We ensure safe recruitment practices are always followed.
12. Awareness training is provided for all colleagues on an annual basis and a register of attendance of this training
kept
This policy will be kept under regular review in light of legal developments and best practice.
Next Review Date –November 2016
SLT Responsibility – Kate Kell VP /Benita Shaw Head of Inclusion
Approved by the Student Well Being Committee on 09 November 2015
Page 1 of 7
OFFICIAL POLICY FOR
CHILD PROTECTION
POLICY
(Statutory)
13. We recognise that students who are abused or witness violence may find it difficult to develop a sense of self
worth. They may feel helplessness, humiliation and some sense of blame. The academy may be the only stable,
secure and predictable element in the lives of students at risk. When at the academy their behaviour may be
challenging and defiant or they may be withdrawn.
The academy will endeavour to support the student through all of our established Behaviour and Rewards and Inclusion
Policies.
Monitoring and Review Flowcharts follow.
This policy will be kept under regular review in light of legal developments and best practice.
Next Review Date –November 2016
SLT Responsibility – Kate Kell VP /Benita Shaw Head of Inclusion
Approved by the Student Well Being Committee on 09 November 2015
Page 2 of 7
OFFICIAL POLICY FOR
CHILD PROTECTION
POLICY
(Statutory)
Appendix 1 Flowchart 1 Referral
Colleague has concerns about
Child’s welfare
Colleague discusses with Line
Manager and/or designated
person (Head of Inclusion) as
they think appropriate.
Still has concerns
Head of Inclusion refers to LA
Child’s social care.
Social worker and manager
acknowledge receipt of referral
and decide on next course of
action within one working day.
Initial assessment required
Social Care level the support
Cause for
Concern
Information held
on file.
No longer has concerns
No further student protection
action, although may need to act
to ensure services provided
Feedback to CP Team
on next course
of action
CP Team to feedback
to relevant PDL.
No further LA Childs’ social care
involvement at this stage,
although other action may be
necessary – e.g. onward referral
Concerns about student’s
immediate safety
See flow chart 3 on emergency
action
See Flow chart 2 on initial
assessment
This policy will be kept under regular review in light of legal developments and best practice.
Next Review Date –November 2016
SLT Responsibility – Kate Kell VP /Benita Shaw Head of Inclusion
Approved by the Student Well Being Committee on 09 November 2015
Page 3 of 7
Flowchart 2 ReferralAppendix 2
INITIAL ASSESSMENT COMPLETED REFERRAL TO LA CHILDRENS
STUDENTS’S SOCIAL CARE
No LA Childs’ social care
support required, but other
action may be necessary –
e.g. onward referral
Early Help/CAF Child in
need support S17
No actual or likely significant
harm
Feedback to Head of
Inclusion
Head of Inclusion to
feedback to HoH/PM
Actual or likely significant
harm
Social worker discusses with
child, family and colleagues
to decide on next steps
Strategy discussion, involving
LA Childrens’ social care,
police and relevant agencies,
to decide whether to initiate
an S47 enquiry
See flowchart 4
Decide what services are
required
In-depth assessment required
Concerns arise about the
student’s safety
Social worker co-ordinates
provision of appropriate
services and records
decisions
Further decisions made about
service provision
Social worker leads core
assessment, other
professionals contribute
Review outcomes for Child
and, when appropriate, close
the case
This policy will be kept under regular review in light of legal developments and best practice.
Next Review Date –November 2016
SLT Responsibility – Kate Kell VP /Benita Shaw Head of Inclusion
Approved by the Student Well Being Committee on 09 November 2015
Page 4 of 7
Flowchart 3: Urgent action to safeguard students
Appendix 3
DECISION MADE THAT EMERGENCY ACTION MAY BE
NECESSARY TO SAFEGUARD A STUDENT
Immediate strategy discussion between LA Childs’ social
care, police and other agencies as appropriate
Relevant agency seeks legal advice and outcome
is recorded
Immediate strategy discussion makes decisions
about:
Immediate safeguarding action
Information giving, especially to parents
Relevant agency sees student and records
outcome
No emergency action
required
Appropriate emergency
action taken
Strategy discussion and
s47 enquiries initiated
Child in need SECTION 17
With family and other
professionals, including
designated person (Head
of Inclusion), agree plan
for ensuring student’s
future safety and welfare
and record decisions
See Flowchart 4
See flowchart 2
This policy will be kept under regular review in light of legal developments and best practice.
Next Review Date –November 2016
SLT Responsibility – Kate Kell VP /Benita Shaw Head of Inclusion
Approved by the Student Well Being Committee on 09 November 2015
Page 5 of 7
Flowchart 4: What happens after the strategy discussion?
Appendix 4
No further LA Childs’ social
care involvement at this
stage, but other services
may be required
STRATEGY DISCUSSION
Decisions to commence core
assessment under
S17 of Childs Act 1989
Concerns about harm not
substantiated but student is
a Child in need
Police investigate
possible crime
Makes decisions about whether
to initiate S47 enquiries and
decisions are recorded
Decision to initiate
S47 enquiries
Social worker leads core assessment under s47 of Childs Act 1989,
and other professionals contribute including the academy via
designated person (Head of Inclusion) or team of CP Officers
With family and other
professionals, agree plan
for ensuring student’s
future safety and welfare
and record decisions
Concerns substantiated but student not at continuing risk
of harm
Agree whether Child Protection Conference is necessary
and record decision
Concerns substantiated – student
at continuing risk of harm
Social work manager convenes Child
protection Conference within 15 working
days of last strategy discussion. Academy
to provide written report
Decisions made and recorded at Child
protection Conference
Student at continuing risk of
significant harm
Student is subject of Child protection plan;
outline Child protection plan prepared; core
group established – see Flowchart 5
Yes
No
Social worker leads completion
of core assessment
With family and other professionals, agree plan for
ensuring student’s future safety and welfare and record
decisions
Student not at continuing risk of
significant harm
Further decisions made about completion
of core assessment and service provision
according to agreed plan
This policy will be kept under regular review in light of legal developments and best practice.
Next Review Date –November 2016
SLT Responsibility – Kate Kell VP /Benita Shaw Head of Inclusion
Approved by the Student Well Being Committee on 09 November 2015
Page 6 of 7
Flowchart 5: What happens after the Child Protection Conference, including the review process?
Appendix 5
Student is the subject of a Child protection plan
Key worker leads on core
assessment to be completed
within 35 working days of
commencement
Core group meets within 10
working days of Child
protection conference to
include designated officer
Core group members
commission further specialist
assessments as necessary
Child protection plan developed by key worker, together with core
group members, and implemented
Core group members provide/commission the necessary interventions
for student and/or family members - Academy included
First Child protection review conference is held within 3 months of initial
conference – Academy to provide written report
Review conference held
No further concerns about harm
Some remaining concerns about harm
Student no longer the subject of
Child Protection Plan and
reasons recorded
Student remains subject of a Child
Protection Plan, which is revised and
implemented
Further decisions made about
continued service provision
Review conference held within 6 months
of initial Child protection review
conference
This policy will be kept under regular review in light of legal developments and best practice.
Next Review Date –November 2016
SLT Responsibility – Kate Kell VP /Benita Shaw Head of Inclusion
Approved by the Student Well Being Committee on 09 November 2015
Page 7 of 7